Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 179

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy and Safety of Dapoxetine for the Treatment of Premature Ejaculation: Integrated Analysis of Results from Five Phase 3 Trials

McMahon, Chris G., Althof, Stanley E., Kaufman, Joel M., Buvat, Jacques, Levine, Stephen B., Aquilina, Joseph W., Tesfaye, Fisseha, Rothman, Margaret, Rivas, David A., Porst, Hartmut·2011·The Journal of Sexual Medicine

Abstract

Introduction: Dapoxetine has been evaluated for the on-demand treatment of premature ejaculation (PE) in five phase 3 studies in various populations worldwide and has recently been approved in several countries. Aim: To present integrated efficacy and safety data from phase 3 trials of dapoxetine. Methods: Data were from five randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies conducted in over 25 countries. Men (N = 6,081) ≥18 years who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition, text revision criteria for PE; four studies required a baseline intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) of ≤2 minutes. Dapoxetine 30 and 60 mg on demand (prn; 1–3 hours before intercourse) were evaluated for either 12 or 24 weeks in four studies; one study evaluated dapoxetine 60 mg daily (qd; included in safety assessments only) or prn for 9 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: End points included stopwatch-measured IELT, Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP) items, clinical global impression of change (CGIC) in PE, and adverse events (AEs). Results: Average IELT (mean [standard deviation], geometric mean [standard error]) increased from baseline (across groups, 0.9 [0.49] minutes, 0.8 [1.01] minutes) to a significantly greater extent with dapoxetine 30 (3.1 [3.91] minutes, 2.0 [1.03] minutes) and 60 mg (3.6 [3.85] minutes, 2.3 [1.03] minutes) vs. placebo (1.9 [2.43] minutes, 1.3 [1.02] minutes; P < 0.001 for all) at week 12 (geometric mean fold increase, 2.5, 3.0, and 1.6, respectively). All PEP items and CGIC improved significantly with both doses of dapoxetine vs. placebo (P < 0.001 for all). The most common AEs included nausea, dizziness, and headache, and evaluation of validated instruments demonstrated no anxiety, akathisia, suicidality, or changes in mood with dapoxetine use and no discontinuation syndrome following abrupt withdrawal. Conclusions: In this diverse population, dapoxetine significantly improved all aspects of PE and was generally well tolerated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02097.x

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 179

Metadata

Authors
McMahon, C. G., Althof, S. E., Kaufman, J. M., Buvat, J., Levine, S. B., Aquilina, J. W., Tesfaye, F., Rothman, M., Rivas, D. A., & Porst, H.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Published
2011-02-01
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
524-539
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
OpenAlex
W1550813904
Cited by
179
References
5
FWCI
8.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficacy and Safety of Dapoxetine for the Treatment of Premature Ejaculation: Integrated Analysis of Results from Five Phase 3 Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02097.x
The paper
McMahon, C. G., Althof, S. E., Kaufman, J. M., Buvat, J., Levine, S. B., Aquilina, J. W., Tesfaye, F., Rothman, M., Rivas, D. A., & Porst, H. (2011). Efficacy and Safety of Dapoxetine for the Treatment of Premature Ejaculation: Integrated Analysis of Results from Five Phase 3 Trials. The Journal of Sexual Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02097.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.